Now the Shakers… That was a good religion. If only more religions shared their belief.

Signature

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Ancient religious origins give believers the excuse to believe in the religion… it is ancient, so you cannot say “Your religion’s start is not valid” and you can not say “Your religion’s start is valid!” either because no-one remembers the start, no-one has the evident to say. But the modern religions don’t have that corner to hide behind, because people do have some history or some evidence about the start of the modern religion. Ancient religions ask us to believe the Mathew/Mark/John/Luke stories of Jesus, or the Jewish stories of Abraham and Moses, who can say these did or didn’t exist without evidence? But if Joesph Smith’s stories make a valid foundation for a religion, then so do Anton LaVey’s stories about Satan, Bobby Henderson’s stories about the FSM, and the stories about the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

But since modern examples of religion have enough details to examine their start, why can’t we say something true like: no, Joseph Smith did not tell the truth about reading golden plates from underneath his hat, plates that he supposedly got from the angel Moroni, he was no better than David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, no better than Marshall Applewhite and Heaven’s Gate, an extremist cult leader.

The Mormon’s have grown since then to establish some good things. I like their chorus at Christmas time. I’m amazed they have a city in the desert. But their foundation, is not valid. And I doubt the city will last, being in the desert.

And just to be fair, we can say that Abraham was a horrible religious extremist parent for trying to sacrifice his own son, and his god was no better than him to ask for a human sacrifice! Then once again his god asked for a human sacrifice at the start of Christianity too, that sacrifice took even if Abraham’s didn’t.

Honestly, I’m surprised to see the Humanists supporting the Church of the Latter Day Saints as valid as the next religion. Hum… telling. So then let all the new religions have their way with the people, let the Humanists not stand in their way and say, “Wait just a minute here, Joseph Smith, he was out of his mind! Those who knew him and followed him were duped.” Instead pay your respects to the Mormons and give them their due, make room for them at the table, and for the Scientologists, and the Mayan end-of-the-world believers, and the out-cast Amish who might establish the next religion. Pose no resistance to the spread.

Ancient religious origins give believers the excuse to believe in the religion… it is ancient, so you cannot say “Your religion’s start is not valid” and you can not say “Your religion’s start is valid!” either because no-one remembers the start, no-one has the evident to say. But the modern religions don’t have that corner to hide behind, because people do have some history or some evidence about the start of the modern religion. Ancient religions ask us to believe the Mathew/Mark/John/Luke stories of Jesus, or the Jewish stories of Abraham and Moses, who can say these did or didn’t exist without evidence? But if Joesph Smith’s stories make a valid foundation for a religion, then so do Anton LaVey’s stories about Satan, Bobby Henderson’s stories about the FSM, and the stories about the Invisible Pink Unicorn.

But since modern examples of religion have enough details to examine their start, why can’t we say something true like: no, Joseph Smith did not tell the truth about reading golden plates from underneath his hat, plates that he supposedly got from the angel Moroni, he was no better than David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, no better than Marshall Applewhite and Heaven’s Gate, an extremist cult leader.

The Mormon’s have grown since then to establish some good things. I like their chorus at Christmas time. I’m amazed they have a city in the desert. But their foundation, is not valid. And I doubt the city will last, being in the desert.

And just to be fair, we can say that Abraham was a horrible religious extremist parent for trying to sacrifice his own son, and his god was no better than him to ask for a human sacrifice! Then once again his god asked for a human sacrifice at the start of Christianity too, that sacrifice took even if Abraham’s didn’t.

Honestly, I’m surprised to see the Humanists supporting the Church of the Latter Day Saints as valid as the next religion. Hum… telling. So then let all the new religions have their way with the people, let the Humanists not stand in their way and say, “Wait just a minute here, Joseph Smith, he was out of his mind! Those who knew him and followed him were duped.” Instead pay your respects to the Mormons and give them their due, make room for them at the table, and for the Scientologists, and the Mayan end-of-the-world believers, and the out-cast Amish who might establish the next religion. Pose no resistance to the spread.

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.